Opinion
23-cv-06381-PCP
08-09-2024
ANTONIO JOAQUIN REICH, Petitioner, v. WARDEN OF SAN QUENTIN STATE PRISON, et al., Respondents.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
P. Casey Pitts United States District Judge
On May 15, 2024, the Clerk of the Court sent to Petitioner an order dismissing the petition with leave to amend. Dkt. No. 16. This mail was returned undelivered on May 31, 2024, and June 4, 2024, bearing the writing “inactive - return to sender - unable to forward.” Dkt. Nos. 17, 18.
The Order was sent to Petitioner at the address he provided. See Dkt. No. 15. More than sixty days have passed since the mail was returned to the Court undelivered, and the Court has received no communication from Petitioner.
Petitioner has failed to comply with Local Rule 3-11(a) which requires a party proceeding pro se to “promptly file with the Court and serve upon all opposing parties a Notice of Change of Address specifying the new address” when his address changes. Local Rule 3-11(b) allows the Court to dismiss a complaint without prejudice when mail directed to a pro se party is returned as not deliverable and the pro se party fails to send written notice of his current address within sixty days of the return of the undelivered mail.
This action is DISMISSED without prejudice because Petitioner failed to keep the Court informed of his address in compliance with Local Rule 3-11(a).
Because this dismissal is without prejudice, Petitioner may ask to reopen the action. To do this, he must file a motion with the words MOTION TO REOPEN written on the first page.
The Clerk shall close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.